PC 04/08/1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

A motion was made by Commissioner Dove, second by Commissioner Kumaran, recommending that the Commission support Option 2 combined with Option 3 on the basis that the Commission ~' recognizes that the City Council has the ultimate authority and the Planning Commission will pass along guidance. ROLL CALL VOTE AYES: Commissioners Bazker, Dove, Kumaran and Chair Cooper NOES: Commissioner Wright ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None RECESS TAKEN AT 9:10 P.M. RECONVENED AT 9:20 P.M. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. Z-98-14, Lee Parodi Application to construct atwo-story, 3,242-square foot custom home at 326 Diamond Court. Zoning for the property is %-1-8,500 (Single-Family Residential) District. Jerry Iserson described the application and location in the Sycamore area. He noted that as part of staffs normal practice, notices were sent to the surrounding neighbors, and three have expressed concern. He stated that although staff attempted to resolve their concerns, they have been unable to do so on a few points, so the matter was referred to the Planning Commission. Mr. Iserson reported that this particulaz site was previously approved for another applicant for a single-family home in 1995, but it was never constructed, and the permit expired. This applicant has, therefore, submitted a new application. Mr. Iserson stated that staff believes the proposed azchitecture of the house is attractive and will fit well with the neighborhood. There are essentially two issues which have generated strong positions between the neighbors and the applicant which are the reason that the application has been brought to the Commission. Regarding the first issue, Mr. Iserson reported that part of the plan is to build a retaining wall along the east property line adjacent to an existing open-rail fence and to fill the existing slope-bank area, thereby leveling it with the elevation of the rest of the site. The applicant's intention is to flatten this azea in order to provide emergency ingress/egress along this side of the property. Mr. Iserson noted that an adjacent neighbor, Dean Macari, has expressed concern with the retaining wall. He stated that the Macazi house is not adjacent to the property, but their driveway passes next to the side yard of the applicant's property. Mr. Macari objects to the retaining wall and believes it would visually impact the view he currently has with the existing open-rail fence along that property line. Mr. Macari originally also stated that he would like the house to be set back ten feet from the property line instead of Planning Commission Page 13 April 8, 1998